 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-2-2019 20:20, MichaelJF wrote:
> Am 23.02.2019 um 08:42 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
>> On 22-2-2019 20:04, MichaelJF wrote:
>>> Hi to the crowd,
>>>
>>> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
>>> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations
>>> to media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or
>>> density_maps different than pigment or texture having no
>>> interpolation between the map entries but shap edges. This is what I
>>> derived in a first attempt. Rendering time was a little bit longer (3
>>> weeks).
>>>
>>
>> Phew... Michael! That is no easy matter to model! But you seem to be
>> on the right track already. Well done so far.
>>
>> I do not understand your comment about the sharp edges using density
>> maps. In my experience they work pretty much like colour or texture
>> maps. May it be a question of scaling which troubles you? That is
>> something where density maps do differ I understand. Maybe a little
>> piece of code can clarify the matter. I am currently putting order in
>> my collection of media tests, so maybe I can help.
>>
>> No kidding? 3 (three) weeks render time?! Wow!
>>
> Hi Thomas,
> this time a didn't click accidentally into the image while converting it
> to jpg with the GIMP, but with purpose. In the marked area you can see
> the sharp edges I mean. The code was
>
OoooK. I see it now. I shall play with your code. Maybe I get a bright
idea ;-)
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-online de> wrote:
> Hi to the crowd,
>
> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations to
> media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or density_maps
> different than pigment or texture having no interpolation between the
> map entries but shap edges. This is what I derived in a first attempt.
> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
>
> Best regards
> Michael
Your light source don't look like from your sun
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.02.2019 um 12:15 schrieb And:
> MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>> Hi to the crowd,
>>
>> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
>> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations to
>> media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or density_maps
>> different than pigment or texture having no interpolation between the
>> map entries but shap edges. This is what I derived in a first attempt.
>> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>
> Your light source don't look like from your sun
>
Hi And,
thanks. I was not clear enough. This is the first flaw I mentioned. To
be exact: sun colour and the colour of the emitting media doesn't match
so far. More or less, in this WIP the sun is just a dummy to hint at my
final intention.
Best regards
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
Eek.
What's the black circle in the lower left part of the render?
This is a great rising steam / mist effect :) You should do a mug of hot
coffee or something as a smaller test render. :D
I see where you're going with the blurred background - but it looks... flat.
I'm not sure if adding a wee bit of emission to it would help, or switching the
palette from rgb to srgb, or changing the gamma would help...
But for a test render, 1. you have the patience of a saint and 2. it's looking
really good
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Am 25.02.2019 um 12:15 schrieb And:
> > MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> >> Hi to the crowd,
> >>
> >> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
> >> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations to
> >> media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or density_maps
> >> different than pigment or texture having no interpolation between the
> >> map entries but shap edges. This is what I derived in a first attempt.
> >> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >> Michael
> >
> > Your light source don't look like from your sun
> >
> Hi And,
> thanks. I was not clear enough. This is the first flaw I mentioned. To
> be exact: sun colour and the colour of the emitting media doesn't match
> so far. More or less, in this WIP the sun is just a dummy to hint at my
> final intention.
>
> Best regards
> Michael
Uh huh, do you know how I'm aware of the problem? Because the tree is not with
its back to the light.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 24-2-2019 20:20, MichaelJF wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> this time a didn't click accidentally into the image while converting it
> to jpg with the GIMP, but with purpose. In the marked area you can see
> the sharp edges I mean. The code was
>
> #if(SteamFog)
> #declare DensBoden1= density {
> agate
> agate_turb 1
> density_map {
> [ 0 rgb <1,1,1>/5 ]
> //[ 0.02 rgb <1,1,1> ]
> [ 0.03 rgb <0,0,0> ]
> [ 1 rgb <0,0,0> ]
> }
> }
>
> #declare DensBoden3= density {
> agate
> agate_turb 1
> density_map {
> [ 0 rgb <1,1,1>/5 ]
> //[ 0.02 rgb <1,1,1> ]
> [ 0.02 rgb <0,0,0> ]
> [ 1 rgb <0,0,0> ]
> }
> scale <5,50,5>
> //warp { turbulence <0.5,0.1,0.5> }
> //rotate <0,90,0>
> }
>
> #declare DensLuft = density {
> rgb <0,0,0>
> }
> box { <-150,0.001,-15>,<150.01,1,150> pigment { rgbt 1 } hollow
> interior {
> media {
> scattering { 2, White/5 }
> //absorption <0,0.25,1>
> //intervals 25
> samples 64
> density {
> gradient y
> density_map {
> [ 0 DensBoden1 ]
> [ 0.5 DensBoden1 ]
> [ 0.6 DensLuft ]
> [ 1 DensLuft ]
> }
> scale <1,2,1> translate <0,-0.5,0> // avoid repetition
> at height 1
> warp { turbulence <0.01,0.4,0.01> }
> }
> }
> media {
> scattering { 2, White/5 }
> //absorption <0,0.25,1>
> //intervals 25
> samples 64
> density {
> gradient y
> density_map {
> [ 0 DensBoden3 ]
> [ 0.5 DensBoden3 ]
> [ 0.6 DensLuft ]
> [ 1 DensLuft ]
> }
> scale <1,2,1> translate <0,-0.5,0> // avoid repetition
> at height 1
> warp { turbulence <0.01,0.3,0.01> }
> }
> }
> #if(GlobalFog)
> media { scattering {2, White/5 } density { rgb 0.001 } }
> #end
> }
> }
> #if(GlobalFog)
> box { <-100,1.001,-5.9>,<100,25,130> pigment { rgbt 1} hollow
> interior {
> media { scattering {2, White/5 } density { rgb 0.0001 } }
> }
> }
> #end
> #end
>
> GlobalFog was activated. May be I have overlooked some thing or the other.
>
My first tests of your code confirms me that the sharp edge is the
result of the container boundary, not of any different behaviour of density.
I want to test different options yet.
--
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.02.2019 um 05:13 schrieb And:
> MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>> Am 25.02.2019 um 12:15 schrieb And:
>>> MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>>>> Hi to the crowd,
>>>>
>>>> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
>>>> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations to
>>>> media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or density_maps
>>>> different than pigment or texture having no interpolation between the
>>>> map entries but shap edges. This is what I derived in a first attempt.
>>>> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>> Michael
>>>
>>> Your light source don't look like from your sun
>>>
>> Hi And,
>> thanks. I was not clear enough. This is the first flaw I mentioned. To
>> be exact: sun colour and the colour of the emitting media doesn't match
>> so far. More or less, in this WIP the sun is just a dummy to hint at my
>> final intention.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>
> Uh huh, do you know how I'm aware of the problem? Because the tree is not with
> its back to the light.
>
Hi And,
there are only two light_sources within the scene. The emitting media
representing the sun and a second miles behind it, but in the same
direction (in front of the camera). The backside illumination of the
trees comes from the reflections of the overall present scattering media
and the use of radiosity.
Best regards
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 25.02.2019 um 22:54 schrieb Bald Eagle:
> MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
>
>
>> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
>
> Eek.
>
> What's the black circle in the lower left part of the render?
>
> This is a great rising steam / mist effect :) You should do a mug of hot
> coffee or something as a smaller test render. :D
>
> I see where you're going with the blurred background - but it looks... flat.
> I'm not sure if adding a wee bit of emission to it would help, or switching the
> palette from rgb to srgb, or changing the gamma would help...
>
> But for a test render, 1. you have the patience of a saint and 2. it's looking
> really good
>
Thanks Bald Eagle,
the black spot is an accident while convertig the image to jpg with the
GIMP. I accidentally clicked into the image with an active pen and
noticed it after the posting.
I will look at my mug tomorrow, but I think it is a steam different to
the one I observed at the moselle last may completely. Anyway, this
would not solve the issue with the rendering time, because the media
will scale with the scene.
Best regards
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
MichaelJF <mi-### [at] t-onlinede> wrote:
> Hi to the crowd,
> this image has still a lot of flaws (sun colour and reflections, the
> swan model itself, textures of the cattails) and may be limitations to
> media by POV. media seems to be handling color_maps or density_maps
> different than pigment or texture having no interpolation between the
> map entries but shap edges. This is what I derived in a first attempt.
> Rendering time was a little bit longer (3 weeks).
as has been said already, that is _some_ image in the making. (almost expected
a mansion at the end of the "boating lake" :-)).
agree that the (sun) colour isn't quite right, too .. vibrant, the overall
"feel" is too warm to expect to see vapour rising into cool/colder air. also,
still just IMO, the sun is a touch high.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 26.02.2019 um 11:15 schrieb Thomas de Groot:
> On 24-2-2019 20:20, MichaelJF wrote:
>> Hi Thomas,
>> this time a didn't click accidentally into the image while converting
>> it to jpg with the GIMP, but with purpose. In the marked area you can
>> see the sharp edges I mean. The code was
>>
>> #if(SteamFog)
>> #declare DensBoden1= density {
>> agate
>> agate_turb 1
>> density_map {
>> [ 0 rgb <1,1,1>/5 ]
>> //[ 0.02 rgb <1,1,1> ]
>> [ 0.03 rgb <0,0,0> ]
>> [ 1 rgb <0,0,0> ]
>> }
>> }
>>
>> #declare DensBoden3= density {
>> agate
>> agate_turb 1
>> density_map {
>> [ 0 rgb <1,1,1>/5 ]
>> //[ 0.02 rgb <1,1,1> ]
>> [ 0.02 rgb <0,0,0> ]
>> [ 1 rgb <0,0,0> ]
>> }
>> scale <5,50,5>
>> //warp { turbulence <0.5,0.1,0.5> }
>> //rotate <0,90,0>
>> }
>>
>> #declare DensLuft = density {
>> rgb <0,0,0>
>> }
>> box { <-150,0.001,-15>,<150.01,1,150> pigment { rgbt 1 } hollow
>> interior {
>> media {
>> scattering { 2, White/5 }
>> //absorption <0,0.25,1>
>> //intervals 25
>> samples 64
>> density {
>> gradient y
>> density_map {
>> [ 0 DensBoden1 ]
>> [ 0.5 DensBoden1 ]
>> [ 0.6 DensLuft ]
>> [ 1 DensLuft ]
>> }
>> scale <1,2,1> translate <0,-0.5,0> // avoid
repetition
>> at height 1
>> warp { turbulence <0.01,0.4,0.01> }
>> }
>> }
>> media {
>> scattering { 2, White/5 }
>> //absorption <0,0.25,1>
>> //intervals 25
>> samples 64
>> density {
>> gradient y
>> density_map {
>> [ 0 DensBoden3 ]
>> [ 0.5 DensBoden3 ]
>> [ 0.6 DensLuft ]
>> [ 1 DensLuft ]
>> }
>> scale <1,2,1> translate <0,-0.5,0> // avoid
repetition
>> at height 1
>> warp { turbulence <0.01,0.3,0.01> }
>> }
>> }
>> #if(GlobalFog)
>> media { scattering {2, White/5 } density { rgb 0.001 } }
>> #end
>> }
>> }
>> #if(GlobalFog)
>> box { <-100,1.001,-5.9>,<100,25,130> pigment { rgbt 1} hollow
>> interior {
>> media { scattering {2, White/5 } density { rgb 0.0001 } }
>> }
>> }
>> #end
>> #end
>>
>> GlobalFog was activated. May be I have overlooked some thing or the
>> other.
>>
>
> My first tests of your code confirms me that the sharp edge is the
> result of the container boundary, not of any different behaviour of
> density.
>
> I want to test different options yet.
>
Hm,
the problem seems to be within the second media statement (the first
produces some ground noise only). The container boundary is at level y=1
(y is up here). The transition between DensBoden3 and DensLuft(=nothing)
is between 0.5 and 0.6 scaled to 1 and 1.2 but then translated to 0.5
and 0.7 which is beneath the container boundary for sure.
Many thanks
Michael
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
